MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068876491 · doi:10.3928/01484834-20120113-01

Longitudinal Study of Emotional Intelligence, Leadership, and Caring in Undergraduate Nursing Students

2012· article· en· W2068876491 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional intelligenceCouragePsychologyAdaptabilityLongitudinal studyNursingMedical educationSocial psychologyMedicineManagementTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study describes the development of emotional intelligence (EI), leadership, and caring in undergraduate nursing students throughout their educational program. A correlational, repeated measures study design was used. Fifty-two nursing students completed four self-report questionnaires on three occasions (T1, T2, T3): BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory: Short (EQ-i:S), Self-Assessment Leadership Instrument (SALI), Caring Ability Inventory (CAI), and Caring Dimensions Inventory (CDI). Mean scores for Total EI did not change significantly over time (T1, 100.1 ± 13.8; T2, 103.1 ± 13.8; T3, 101.6 ± 14.7). However, EI adaptability was higher at T2 (101.6 ± 13.1) and T3 (101.8 ± 14.1) than at T1 (97.0 ± 12.5; p = 0.03), as was CAI Courage (64.2 ± 9.5, 66.7 ± 9.5, 66.9 ± 8.7; p = 0.04) and the CDI (96.8 ± 18.1, 103.0 ± 7.3, 102.0 ± 10.9; p = 0.02). Changes in EI were positively correlated (r > 0.50, p < 0.001) with changes in SALI, CAI Knowing, and CAI Courage. During the undergraduate program, significant increases occurred in caring and EI adaptability but not in overall EI or leadership.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.221
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it